I am now one step closer to starting a UCSD Brikwars League.

[Professor Fairfield]

A bit of a claim, seeing as I seem to fit the so-called true Brikwarrior's textbook definition of "anti-fun." You're welcome to try, however.

[Rayhawk]

You can bite my plastic yellow ass; I take that personally, and I am no retard. If you're such a pissant about doing the slightest degree of calculations or tactics, I'd say the bigger retard is you. Thinking men may have less fun, but don't call them retards.

Man, I want to agree with you on the merits of your position, but I also want to argue with you on the assiness of your expression of that position. If you can't handle complete strangers calling you a retard on purposefully flimsy justification, you need to switch your browser over to the OTHER internet (tits or GTFO, so to speak). So I'm going to write the rest of this like a Choose Your Own Adventure, depending on how much you're looking for a dimmy fight.

ARGUMENT: If "thinking men have less fun," and you're choosing activities for which having fun is not just one of the goals but in fact the entire goal, then even "the slightest degree of calculations and tactics" will tell you that you've chosen a poor strategy.

AGREEMENT: A rule that tells you not to follow rules is part of BrikWars' satiric conceit. If you don't enjoy that rule, ignore it; that's its paradoxical point of existence. Making fun of you for feeling the way you do is also part of the satire, because taking yourself seriously makes the rest of us obligated not to.

FOLLOW-UP ARGUMENT: I have spent way too much time in the Ivy League and in the company of recognized bona fide geniuses (outside of the Ivy League, obviously) for anyone to tell me I don't have a right to say that academics and geniuses are retards. I have studied the conditions extensively and believe myself to be well-versed in their symptoms and long-term prognosis.

AGREEMENT: The bigger retard is, admittedly, me. You would have to work really, really hard to catch up with me in the retard department. I feel a certain amount of pride in having accomplished this, considering my upbringing.

The rule I have much more of a problem with is the What-I-Say-Goes Roll. Mainly because, while the Rule of Fudge is designed to streamline the game, WISGRs can easily have the exact opposite effect, but still get associated therewith. Again, in his endless glaring bias, Mike only recognises jerky, cumbersome behavior as being constant reference to the rulebook; he's completely ignoring that anybody who wants to make a constant WISG role when the "less-important" rules give him a clear disadvantage is also being a jerk and holding up the game, and in fact, is an even bigger one.

ARGUMENT / AGREEMENT: Now hold on sir! I find your allegation completely unfair! In fact my opinion about WISG is very clearly spelled out in the section in which it's introduced. Or in the sidebar to that section, which is close enough:

http://www.brikwars.com/rules/2005/1.htm#2

In short, I see WISG's ability to let assholes be assholes as a strong advantage in the long run, even if it's a disadvantage in the short term.


IN SUMMARY:

ARGUMENT: Your argument is a little along the lines of "I don't like Checkers because it has checkers in it." If you don't like checkers, Checkers is probably not the right game for you. There are other games.

AGREEMENT: Disregard the above ARGUMENT. The point of WISG and Fudge are not to punish players who like rules, but to remind everybody that if your goal is to enjoy yourself, then games and rulebooks should be used as far as they support that goal, but only as far as they support that goal. If you like a game with more meat and less fudge, then play with more meat and less fudge. If your opponents like more fudge and less meat, then you have to negotiate, but it's important to be deliberate and conscious about negotiatiating those points rather than automatically deciding the other party is wrong just because they base their priorities on different values than you do.

Now you're going to say "in that case then you shouldn't call me a retard," but no, you're still a retard. The reason we're making fun of you (and people like you) is because no reasonable person should take seriously accusations of retardedness for holding a position which is obviously correct to everyone involved. If you're insecure enough to get offended when we say "that Fairfield's a retard, he thinks 1+1=2" (And in fact that does sound a lot like something we might say), then clearly you're a retard.

Obviously we know 1+1=2, obviously you know 1+1=2, so we have no reason to doubt that everyone's in on the joke, just like every other baseless insult that gets tossed around in here. (Serious insults, when they start to occur, get deleted and I tend to ban the members gauche enough to employ them.)

In-jokes are crucial to social group identity formation, and that's the one that happens to be ours. So chill out!

[IVhorseman]

Yeah. She's cute.

[Warhead]

In-jokes are crucial to social group identity formation

Oh, but I always thought it was 'cause we were socially inept and screwed up individuals who can't stand each other... sooo, your saying that isn't the group identity then? I'm confused and disoriented, the world of Brikwars no longer makes sense to me. Does the group identity thing infer we actually like each other? *shivers*

[Professor Fairfield]

ARGUMENT: Your argument is a little along the lines of "I don't like Checkers because it has checkers in it." If you don't like checkers, Checkers is probably not the right game for you. There are other games.

Except that no; it isn't. The equivalent to that is saying "I don't like Brikwars because it has bricks in it." Obviously, that's not true. The reason I'm pissed is because I came here based on the lure of a Lego-centric game, and it pisses me off to see other people who play it throwing disses at me for how I want to play it. Granted, Brikwars by its very nature is easier to fudge, given that unlike, say, Dungeons and Dragons, it's already more physically manifested. You can see the soldiers, tanks, dragons, and evil volcano bases right there, so less mathematical calculations are required to figure it all out.

Then again, though, that's not why I have a problem. Even WISGRs aren't why. It's because you're calling me a retard. It doesn't matter if it's as a joke. Enough people have done it to me in all seriousness that I detest being called a retard, and I do not belive that humor requires blatant use of untruths and insults. Really, Mike, I would be lying if I said I didn't find your sense of humor great 99% of the time. I laugh my ass off at your manuals, when I'm not shaking my head, but most of the time I'm not shaking my head. The whole concept of Brikwars is funny. Now that you're actually going and arguing with yourself, though, it's a new low for you. Humor needs something left to stand on so it's clear what it's making fun of, that's why I prefer satire, the brand of humor that embraces reality so it can turn around and beat the fuck out of it, over this illogical, stoner-centric, Williamstreet bullshit.

I'm not here for that. I don't give a fuck if I don't fit the average profile of a Brikwarrior. I came here for the title concept at its bare bones, and that's it. I'm not going out of my way to alienate any of you, but I will not stand for being insulted, even when it's not serious. Insincerity is the weakest form of humor available, one that I am above. I will, however, agree to be part of a running joke of sorts, something of self-parody if you will, in terms of modeling my gamer persona after these spats, and making him and his forces like the estranged mad scientists of Brikwars, eager for revenge. I must start building my volcano base...

Edit: Oh, und vait! Zat rrremindss mich! Vy ze bums do Ich nicht hab Professor Monkeyhead displayed?! Is zis a trick of yours?! Ich vant Professor Monkeyhead as ein avatar!

[IVhorseman]

Oh come on, I like Williamstreet.

[Professor Fairfield]

I used to. Space Ghost Coast to Coast still amuses me. The newer shows, though, I feel like they just stopped thinking. Only Robot Chicken is watchable now to me, and even that has gotten worse, as per one of the unspoken rules of sketch comedy shows.

[tahthing]

ARGUMENT: Your argument is a little along the lines of "I don't like Checkers because it has checkers in it." If you don't like checkers, Checkers is probably not the right game for you. There are other games.

Except that no; it isn't. The equivalent to that is saying "I don't like Brikwars because it has bricks in it." Obviously, that's not true. The reason I'm pissed is because I came here based on the lure of a Lego-centric game, and it pisses me off to see other people who play it throwing disses at me for how I want to play it. Granted, Brikwars by its very nature is easier to fudge, given that unlike, say, Dungeons and Dragons, it's already more physically manifested. You can see the soldiers, tanks, dragons, and evil volcano bases right there, so less mathematical calculations are required to figure it all out.

Then again, though, that's not why I have a problem. Even WISGRs aren't why. It's because you're calling me a retard. It doesn't matter if it's as a joke. Enough people have done it to me in all seriousness that I detest being called a retard, and I do not belive that humor requires blatant use of untruths and insults. Really, Mike, I would be lying if I said I didn't find your sense of humor great 99% of the time. I laugh my ass off at your manuals, when I'm not shaking my head, but most of the time I'm not shaking my head. The whole concept of Brikwars is funny. Now that you're actually going and arguing with yourself, though, it's a new low for you. Humor needs something left to stand on so it's clear what it's making fun of, that's why I prefer satire, the brand of humor that embraces reality so it can turn around and beat the fuck out of it, over this illogical, stoner-centric, Williamstreet bullshit.

I'm not here for that. I don't give a fuck if I don't fit the average profile of a Brikwarrior. I came here for the title concept at its bare bones, and that's it. I'm not going out of my way to alienate any of you, but I will not stand for being insulted, even when it's not serious. Insincerity is the weakest form of humor available, one that I am above. I will, however, agree to be part of a running joke of sorts, something of self-parody if you will, in terms of modeling my gamer persona after these spats, and making him and his forces like the estranged mad scientists of Brikwars, eager for revenge. I must start building my volcano base...

Edit: Oh, und vait! Zat rrremindss mich! Vy ze bums do Ich nicht hab Professor Monkeyhead displayed?! Is zis a trick of yours?! Ich vant Professor Monkeyhead as ein avatar!

1:the idea of not likeing "checkers because it has checkers" in this term means "i don't like the game because of the rules" the game and the rules are the same, the part you like are the bricks.

2:your trying to "base" the humor on battles between space men and cavemen?

3:1+1= window

[Professor Fairfield]

I don't understand your grammar with, "you're trying to bring base the humor." Worse than Zero Wing, and much less funny.

However, it's probably not a good idea to make a battle between spacemen and cavemen if you want to keep things simple. Even if you want to force logic out the door to make things fair, you'll probably find that you need to do even more second-guessing just to maintain that forced leveling. Besides, cavemen would be kind of dull to base a Lego army on, considering they didn't really "build" anything.

[tahthing]

I don't understand your grammar with, "you're trying to bring base the humor." Worse than Zero Wing, and much less funny.

However, it's probably not a good idea to make a battle between spacemen and cavemen if you want to keep things simple. Even if you want to force logic out the door to make things fair, you'll probably find that you need to do even more second-guessing just to maintain that forced leveling. Besides, cavemen would be kind of dull to base a Lego army on, considering they didn't really "build" anything.

refer to the flintstones for true in stight into what i mean as a "caveman" army.

[Almighty Benny]

Professor, I'm glad that you enjoy playing what you consider to be BrikWars. Everyone has their own concept of what it actually is. However, I think that you are one of the first people to come in here fully expecting a serious discussion of a rules-based wargame.

This is not wrong of you.

But, since you are the first (and hopefully last) of these types of players - AKA Anoraks - posting on these forums, you will just have to expect a certain amount of criticism.

Unfortunately for you, you are taking everything very personally and for absolutely no reason. If you can't handle meaningless and unfounded insults from someone you have never met via the internet, then you are not the type of person that will enjoy these forums. It isn't going to get any better, and whining about it can do nothing but make it worse.

Let's not get caught up in the accuracy of metaphors, but seriously... stop thinking that 1+1 necessarily equals 2 and you will have much more fun on the BrikWars forums.

[Professor Fairfield]

Yeah, great idea. While I'm at it, why don't I forget that Legos necessarily connect at the studs and bases, and try to build things by stacking things side by side, sure that they'll fit?! Logic has its place, even in preparing for this game. Sure, that clearly doesn't reflect on the forums' psyche, but I do not care.

My personal interpretation of common courtesy is nobody insults anybody else, and everybody agrees to decapitate the one who steps out of line, whereas yours seems to be everyone insults everybody and tolerates it. Not exactly compatible viewpoints, but I don't care to get along. As another poster said, BW's "sense of community" is ultimately based upon a mutual interest in a gratuitously violent pastime, so from that angle, I'm not such a stranger to the BW mindset, afterall, and I'm plenty happy to channel my anger into painting the battlefield red with the blood of my opponents' armies, rather than having a flame war here. I didn't start this one, either; I just came to my own defense when I posted something I consider to be advancing the cause of BW, and that I felt got pissed upon. If nothing else, this has been a learning experience for me; in the future I will not post such announcements in Battle Organization.

[IVhorseman]

Yeah, great idea. While I'm at it, why don't I forget that Legos necessarily connect at the studs and bases, and try to build things by stacking things side by side, sure that they'll fit?! Logic has its place, even in preparing for this game. Sure, that clearly doesn't reflect on the forums' psyche, but I do not care.

Well wait hold on, this is a logical fallacy. It's a "Slippery Slope" fallacy, claiming that one thing will invariably lead to another to another, which isn't necessarially true.

I think basically the whole thing you're seeing is Brikwars being a game about someone winning, and everyone else losing. Why take that mentality? Brikwars is less of a competition, and more of a collaberative piece of artwork, where the goal is to create an entertaining and destructive battle of inhuman proportions. Sure, it's nice if your team wins, but it's nicer when everyone shows up, plays a game, and has a good time just doing stupid crap.

And what the hell, Metalocalypse is brilliantly written. Also, Morel Orel and Superjail are both severely underrated.

Also Also, Benny, I've actually met this guy in person before.

[Almighty Benny]

While I'm at it, why don't I forget that Legos necessarily connect at the studs and bases, and try to build things by stacking things side by side, sure that they'll fit?!

Good idea, then maybe you can make one of these

[Professor Fairfield]

Well wait hold on, this is a logical fallacy. It's a "Slippery Slope" fallacy, claiming that one thing will invariably lead to another to another, which isn't necessarially true.

No; not necessarily. Wait for my answer down at the bottom, though, for clarification.

Also Also, Benny, I've actually met this guy in person before.

Don't be too jealous, though, guys. I'm not nearly so menacing in person--and neither is he, for that matter. For example, he wasn't actually carrying an "orange, transparent chainsaw" when I visited him.